Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1887-07-14

MR. EDITOR In last weeks Chronicle, a.
criticism appears of sermon | preached on
the first Sabbath of July. If it was a mere
dissent to what was said, / would let it pass
without notice, but there is such a complete
misapprehension of the subject, and of what
was said. that am not willing that the mat
ter should lie before your readers without cor
rection The large congregation present that
dav will not need these statements to remind
them of what was actually said. While pub
lie discourse is always open to just criticism,
it is not open to misstatements and perversion,
and against these l complain.
Nv text was Isaiah, 6O:l2: For the nation
and kingdom that will not serve thee shall per-
ish" The subject was the possible dangers
hanging over our country and our only safety,
and not national anniversaries" as stated.
The only allusion to Queen Victoria was in
the first sentence, and is as follows 'On that
great occasion, two weeks ago, when Queen
Victoria rode in royal state TO Westminster
Abbey, to celebrate the ffteth anniversary of
her magnificent reign, these would have been
appropriate words to utter in the hearing OF
Queen and people rejoicing in their power and
greatness, The nation and kingdom that will
not serve God shall perish" l leave your
readers to comware this with the criticism on
it. What in this is unrepublican and in
consistent with the " teaching of the Master?'
1t was merely statement that the pawer and
greatness of England could not save her If she
forsook God. That was all there was of it.
As to glorifying wealth and pomp and pow
err" that was Just what l did not do. One OF
the dangers Of this country, | said, was the
great accumulation Of wealth, leading to vice
and corruption, especially dangerous if in the
hands of a few Individuals or great corpora
tions. A man of vast wealth has great power
for good or evil, and if he should use this power
against the interests Of the country, it may be
disastrous. This is the substance of all that
was said on that point. Ineither glOriied rich
men, nor condemned them, but simply declared
that what seemed to be a source of strength
might be q source OF weakness and ruin to our
countrs.
As to the President being "ruler," Weo-
ster SAYS a ruler sis one who exercises sway
and authority, a governor" The best histori-
ans, writer's and speakers are accustomed to
refer in this way to the head of our govern
ment.
When nv attention was called to the article
| in your paper | was surprised that plain lam
guage could have been so misunderstood, and
and considering the subject discussed am pre-
pared to defend all statements made, and to
relterate lneU On any proper OCCdslOh 40 u u'ii2
profitable to all people.
In conclusion, must say that it is discour-
aging to public speaker, if he can not make
himself better understood by his hearers
Perhaps the writer OF the article in question
was the only one who failed TO catch the mean,
ing of what was said. ROBERT ALEXANDER.
DR.. Alexander is mistaken. A gentle.
man of mature years, and one of the most
clear headed of his congregation, called
the writer's attention to the matter on
the following day. No doubt the speak
er knows what he said, and what be
meant to express, better than any one
else; but that it made an unpleasant
impression upon more than one of his
bearers there is DO doubt.
The Constitution of the United States
is better authority as to the powers OF
the President than dictionaries or his
torians. When the latter speak of him
as ruler, they are inaccurate. He is
the executive, with limited powers.